Boxall & Purcell (2003) states that HRM can be interpreted as having a ‘soft’ developmental humanist approach or a ‘hard’ situational contingent approach. The soft version emphasizes a people-centred approach to HRM, whereas the hard version emphasizes a resource-based approach (Thornhill & Saunders 1998). Although the organisation appears to be soft with the implementation of teams, they can be viewed as being hard economically, as the organisation aims were resource focused, there appeared to be low trust between employees, and there was also functional flexibility within the teams (Kane et al. 1999). Responsibility for hiring new staff, and for assessing applications for internal transfers, were devolved to shop-floor workers, thus making them more flexible. A hard approach is often seen as an essential part of cost-minimization strategy (Kane et al. 1999), which appears to be the situation at Lynemouth.
TEAM EFFECTIVENSS & THE EFFECT OF MOTIVATION:
A team is a work group or a unit with a common purpose through which members develop mutual relationships for the achievement of goals/tasks (Harris & Harris 1996). Vyakarnam et al (1999) states that a number of studies have confirmed that successful ventures are often established by teams rather than a single person, and the core competence of a successful team is to build and manage relationships around a common vision. The management team at Lynemouth haven’t clearly described the team goals or each individual’s specific task. It is essential that the first step in creating a team is to define the goal or goals that create the direction for the new group (Twomey & Kleiner 1996; Arroba 1996).
Harris & Harris (1996) explain that teams are successful and effective when they overcome difficulties, achieved through interdependence. Teams also promote a sense of confidence and direction among the team members and helps becoming more flexible in nature (Arroba 1996). Among shop-floor workers at Lynemouth with regard to satisfaction and commitment, there was a greater sense of autonomy and participation. With regard to work organisation, there was an increase in multi-skilling, and there were clear examples of improved flexibility. For example, team members would work a crane as required, rather than waiting for a dedicated crane driver. The major difference between successful teamwork and unsuccessful teamwork is largely based upon team members sharing common goals and working together to achieve them (Tarricone & Luca 2002). They also state that ineffective communication, lack of resources and lack of trust are the key attributes that hinder the effectiveness of a team. At Lynemouth, the workers were clear that the divide between manager and worker was as sharp as ever and that the enforcement of discipline was not part of the team’s duties. There appeared to be low trust between them, and also communication with regard to specific tasks seems to be lacking. It is also advisable to establish a sense of urgency so that the teams don’t get complacent (Twomey & Kleiner 1996).
Ritchie & Martin (2001) states that money and tangible rewards, the physical conditions and the structure are the three key factors motivating people in a working environment. Although teamwork was favourable from a shop-floor point of view, middle managers and technical staff had reservations about teamwork, feeling undervalued and lacking determination. Macaulay & Cook (2001) states that rewards and recognition processes help to focus attention on priorities, thus motivating individuals. Group leaders felt that the work they were being given was not sufficiently demanding, and technical staff felt that that their job territory was under threat. There seems to be a need for rules and guidelines in the work place, for direction and certainty (Ritchie & Martin 2001). Thompson (2004) concludes that people could be motivated further and made more effective if they were given appropriate encouragement and attention.
COMMUNICATION & CULTURE:
According to Connolly (1996) communication is a critical issue and everyone wants better communication within their team, between teams and across their organization. Employee communication should play a strategic role in an organization to work effectively (Barrett 2002). In the early 1990’s there was a wide perception at Lynemouth that communication was poor, and the climate of employee relations could be characterized as suspicious and mistrustful. Barrett (2002) also emphasizes that without effective employee communication, change is impossible, and in 1997 with Lynemoth’s future in doubt, the management realized the importance of communication and set about to win employee consent by reforming the communication system. With regard to this, teamwork was introduced with the cooperation of the plant’s trade unions, which encouraged further development in employee relations. However, with the success of teamwork, white-collar staff felt undervalued. Peng & Litteljohn (2001) asserts that structural arrangements may facilitate communication on the one hand, and create barriers for communication on the other. Group leaders felt that their status and authority were being eroded, and technical staff felt that their job territory was under threat, and changes were made without consulting the people involved, and there was a feeling that the appraisal system was not adequate, as the management did not seem to listen. Connolly (1996) states that to enhance communication, both the employer and the employee should realize the importance of effective communication. The author concludes by saying that perhaps the most effective ways of improving communication are also the simplest - taking the time to really notice the employees, listening to how they speak and more importantly to what they say. The management could create a system where employees are rewarded for their good work, as Storey (1995) states that the way in which employees are rewarded is central to the regulation of employment relationship.
Handy (1986) states that every organization is different, and each organization has a different culture – sets of values and norms and beliefs. In 1990, many workers had been with the plant since it opened, and labour turnover was low. Majority of the workers were male, with few women being employed in clerical posts. There is a close and sometimes unclear relationship between organisational culture and it’s climate (Wallace, J et al. 1999). Although the climate of employee relations could be characterised as suspicious and mistrustful at Lynemouth, work organisation was considered to be fairly conventional. Handy (1986) argues that if organizations are to survive and meaningful jobs are to be created for all those who want to work, then both organizations and individuals will have to change the way they perceive jobs and careers. He also states that fewer, better-motivated people could create much more added value than large groups of unthinking, demotivated individuals. Lynemouth, with the introduction of teamworking could be seen as incorporating these values. However, the management at Lynemouth should create meaningful jobs for all employees. The structure of Lynemouth’s employees could be characterized under senior managers, middle managers and workers. Handy (1986) argues that organizations are not owned by anyone, but are a community of people who could be called citizens of the community rather than employees. Ogbor (2001) asserts that organisational culture should discourage dysfunctional work behaviours, and commit members of the organization to do things for and with one another that are in the best interests of the organization.
LEADERSHIP QUALITIES:
The American general, Dwight Eisenhower, once said that the essence of leadership is to make people do what you want them to with as much will, determination and enthusiasm as if they had decided for themselves (Popper & Zakkai 1994). Cacioppe (1997) suggests that recent reviews of the research and theories on leadership have consolidated the key areas of leadership into personality, transactional and transformational forms of leadership. He also states that honesty, inspiration, competent, fair-mindedness and supportiveness are the characteristics that people most admire in leaders, where as Tait (1996) suggests that vision, interpersonal skills, character and drive are the four attributes considered to be necessary personality traits for business leadership. Transactional leadership is based on the interplay between the leader’s guidance or direction and socio-emotional support, and the readiness or developmental level that followers exhibit on a particular task, function, or objective (Avery and Ryan 2002). The third major approach is the Transformational leadership which communicates a vision that inspires and motivates people to achieve something extraordinary (Cacioppe 1997).
Transactional leadership remains highly popular among practitioners and it could be applied at Lynemouth. It appeals to managers because of its intuitive simplicity, ease of use, and perceived relevance to managerial roles (Avery and Ryan 2002). In 2000, with the end of direct supervision, management appointed team leaders from existing team members, following a formal application procedure. Team leaders were made responsible for team briefing and the coordination and scheduling of work, and they did receive an additional weekly allowance of £100. The management at Lynemouth could also try to incorporate the transformational leadership values by providing every individual and team with a vision and also motivating them, thus improving leadership effectiveness at the team levels (Cacioppe 1996). Silverthorne (2000) believes that the readiness and willingness of subordinates to perform tasks are the important aspects that contribute to a leader's effectiveness.
CONCLUSION:
This assignment investigated the current HRM principles being used within the organisation. A few key points in improving the effectiveness of an organisation are effective teams, effective communication between the teams and good leadership skills. Lynemouth could improve the effectiveness of their organisation by motivating each individual, improving the communication between the employers and the management, and also by providing individual, team and organisational goals for the leaders to follow.
REFERENCE:
Armstrong, M 2000, ‘The name has changed but has the game remained the same?’, Journal of Employee Relations, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 576-593.
Arroba, T 1996, ‘Why are common objectives so uncommon in top management teams?’, Journal of Team Performance Management, vol. 2, no. 1, pp 17-21.
Avery, G.C & Ryan, J 2002, ‘Applying situational leadership in Australia’, The Journal of Management Development, vol. 21, no. 4, pp 242-262.
Barrett, D.J 2002, ‘Change communication: using strategic employee communication to facilitate major change’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 7, no. 4, pp 219-234.
Boxall, P & Purcell, J 2003, Strategy and Human Resource Management, Palgrave, New York.
Cacioppe, R 1997, ‘Leadership moment by moment!’, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, vol. 18, no. 7, pp 335-345.
Connolly, C 1996, ‘Communication: getting to the heart of the matter’, Journal of Management Development Review, vol. 9, no. 7, pp 37-40.
Handy, C.B 1976, Understanding Organisations, Penguin Group, London.
Harris, P.R & Harris, K.G 1996, ‘Managing effectively through teams’, Journal of Team Performance Management, vol. 2, no. 3, pp 23-36.
Kane, B et al. 1999, ‘Barriers to effective HRM’, International Journal of Manpower, vol. 20, no. 8, pp 494-516.
Macaulay, S & Cook, S 2001, ‘Rewarding Service Success’, Journal of Team Performance Management, vol. 5, no. 1, pp 4-8.
Ogbor, J.O 2001, ‘Critical theory and the hegemony of corporate culture’, Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 14, no. 6, pp 590-638.
Peng, W & Litteljohn, D 2001, ‘Organisational communication and strategy implementation – a primary inquiry’, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 13, no. 7, pp 360-363.
Popper, M & Zakkai, E 1994, ‘Transactional, Charismatic and Transformational Leadership: Conditions Conducive to their Predominance’, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, vol. 15, no. 6, pp 3-7.
Silverthorne, C 2000, ‘Situational leadership theory in Taiwan: a different culture perspective’, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, vol. 21, no. 2, pp 68-74.
Sisson, K 1994, Personnel Management – A comprehensive guide to Theory and Practice in Britain, 2nd edn, Blackwell, Oxford.
Storey, J 1995, Human Resource Management – A critical text, Thomson, London.
Storey, J 1995, ‘Is HRM catching on?’, International Journal of Manpower, vol. 16, no. 4, pp 3-10.
Storey, J 1996, Blackwell cases in Human Resource and Change Management, Blackwell, Oxford.
Tait, R 1996, ‘The attributes of leadership’, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, vol 17, no. 1, pp27-31.
Tarricone, P & Luca, J 2002, ‘Employees, teamwork and social interdependence – a formula for successful business?’, Journal of Team Performance Management, vol. 8, no. 3, pp 54-59.
Thompson, J. L 2004, ‘Innovation through people’, Journal of Management Decision, vol. 42, no. 9, pp 1082-1094.
Thornhill, A & Saunders, M.N.K 1998, ‘What if line managers don’t realize they’re responsible for HR?’, Personnel Review Journal, vol. 12, no. 6, pp 460-476.
Twomey, K & Kleiner, B.H 1996, ‘Teamwork: The essence of the successful organisation’, vol. 2, no. 1, pp 6-8.
Vyakarnam, S et al. 1999, ‘Exploring the formation of entrepreneurial teams: the key to rapid growth business?’, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 6, no. 2, pp 153-165.
Wallace, J 1999, ‘The relationship between organisational culture, organisational climate and managerial values’, International Journal of Public Sector Management, vol. 12, no. 7, pp 548-564.
